Reviews

This documentary could've been 20 episodes. The filmmaker did an outstanding job From the many reviews I have read, you do not seem to get it! This was not based on the suppressed memory of several people! This was based on the suppressed memory of one person! A memory so horrible *spoiler* (being shown the dead body of her beloved teacher & being told, "see what happens when you say bad things about people"), that she buried it deeply into her soul. For the reviewer who could not understand *spoiler* that Maskell showed her the dead body, I am assuming you did not watch the entire series? Maskell was "powerful and protected" - *spoiler* Maskell's brother was the Police lieutenant, his best friend was a policeman and Maskell was the Police chaplain...do I need to spell this out? Who would've believed Jane Doe IF she was not afraid to come forward? In addition, by showing her the body, he was directly threatening her. And to those reviewers who wonder about the lack of evidence? *Spoiler* did you miss the part where the police allegedly lost the evidence during Hurricane Agnes?

When the lawyers published an ad (NO money mentioned, just a "Do you know something?"), they received an influx of letters from women who either were affected or knew of someone who was affected.

And for you non-Catholics, you must understand that in the late 60s to 70s, priests were considered God. They were not questioned. They were not to be doubted. One man in the documentary said it best, when the priests visited Catholic elementary school classrooms, when the priests entered the classroom, "there was silence." Very true. So many sexually abused children of priests were deeply afraid to come forward. My own friends, who were abused in their childhood by our parish priest (from ages 8 to 12), did not tell me until they were in their 40s. When I asked "Why didn't you tell me?" their response was, "We were afraid you would tell your mother and she would call the parish or the police."

Jane Roe did not have suppressed memory! She came forward when she read that someone else had been abused. Then more and more came forward. And you must realize, those of us students who were unaffected by the abuse witnessed the behavior of our fellow students who were molested! They appeared drugged, their personalities had changed, their grades dropped, etc.

Nobody received $40 million dollars. Those affected received ridiculously modest settlements despite the horrors they had endured. And the ending *spoiler* which nobody seems to "get" is that this all could've been prevented if the Archdiocese of Baltimore had admitted to Jane Doe (the first woman to report the abuse at Archbishop Keough High School), that yes, indeed, her memories were confirmed by the fact that a year prior to her abuse, a mother at St. Clement's elementary school had reported Maskell's abuse of her son to the police! The Archdiocese told Jane Doe she did NOT have a case because there was no record of any abuse by this said "priest." Instead, the Archdiocese ignored this mother's protest and reassigned Maskell to Archbishop Keough where this monster unleashed further horrors upon many other young girls' lives with a willing accomplice, Father Magnus.

God bless all of the women affected by the Father Monsters and in loving memory to those who committed suicide, had abortions or gave birth and those currently enduring drug or alcohol dependencies or died due to those dependencies because of the atrocities of these two "priests". Maskell could've been removed by the Archdiocese of Baltimore but the AOB prevented it ase Archbishop Keeler was about to be made a Cardinal. And in loving memory of Sister Cathy Cesnik, who was killed because she was about to reveal all of these atrocities to the Archdiocese the next day, but was killed before she moved forward.

This is an absolutely enjoyable film on every level. My favorite part of the entire film (**SPOILER**) is the slow realization that appears over Wilson's glowing face when he finally realizes he has gone back in time. Wilson's sitting at a party, having a glorious time with F. Scott & Zelda Fitzgerald, then is astounded to see Josephine Baker dancing. I could watch this scene a thousand times.

Reading the IMDb reviews prompted me to write one. Unlike some reviewers, I truly love the show's concept of four ridiculous ingredients and having to whip up an appetizer, entree and dessert within so-many minutes. Obviously, many other viewers do as well which is why the show is still on the air. Ted Allen is the perfect host.

I wholeheartedly agree that the judges can be irritating. *SPOILER ALERT* In the episode "Offal Surprise", Marc Murphy reprimands (!) Aaron Dubois, a chef with a great personality, for taking a sip of alcohol while he was making his dish. Dubois counters, "I was just having fun!" Dubois is then reprimanded for having fun in the competition. I kid you not! *SPOILER ALERT* In the episode "Viewers' Choice Baskets", Scott Conant, after tasting Tre Goshall's dish, states "that is the worst thing I've ever put in my mouth." Goshall counters, "I think that is an exaggeration." Indeed! There you have two examples of the sizes of Murphy's and Conant's egos.

My least favorite judge is Maneet Chauhan. If I had a dollar for every time she states, "too sweet"! My hope is that Maneet goes on a permanent vacation from Chopped. Alex Guarnaschelli seems moody; in some episodes, she is completely fair and in others, Alex appears to be very nasty.

I agree with the IMDb reviewers that the judges' decision on who wins each round seems fixed. *SPOILER ALERT* For example, I thought for sure that Dubois would win the "Offal Surprise" episode but as soon as he expressed that he was "having fun", Dubois' fate was inevitable.

If Chopped would do away with the "panel of judges" concept and stick to three fair judges, particularly Aaron Sanchez, Marcus Samuelson & Amanda Freitag, viewers would be happy.They criticize without slinging insults and praise with warmth and friendliness. However, I know the panel of judges format is here to stay and that the judges have very busy lives in reality, being unable to donate their time to every Chopped episode.

After reading the IMDb comments on Flip or Flop, I agree with you about the fake parts of the show. (SPOILER ALERT) HGTV expects us to believe that they borrowed money from her father to flip a house. REALLY? I am positive that Tarek & Christina have a great income especially based on their car, their clothing, their home, etc. In addition, HGTV is paying them quite a few dollars per episode.

(SPOILER ALERT) One show featured their car being stolen. It was recovered the next day by the police. REALLY?

My biggest criticism is Christina's nasally voice. They need to spend a few dollars on her taking voice diction lessons to stop her from talking through her nose. We mute the show whenever we watch. We watch because we are flipping our house and Christina has great ideas. She is so pretty but her voice puts off viewers.

SPOILER ALERT***SPOILER ALERT*** I was so looking forward to the new version of "Stepford Wives". Since the original was made in 1975, I was looking forward to not only today's special effects, but how much scarier it would be. Sadly, the filmmakers decided to turn it into a comedy. HUGE mistake with many repercussions.

EXAMPLE: 1975 Version: The scene ends with Joanna confronting the men's club and learning the truth: that all wives have been killed and replaced with clone robots. The next and final scene shows Joanna, as a robot, pushing a cart in the local grocery, greeting the other wives, also pushing carts.

2004 Version. The scene ends with Joanna (donning short, dark hair) confronting the men's club and the viewer thinks she is learning the truth. Instead of cutting to the original final scene, the filmmakers added a scene. Glenn Close's character, Claire, is throwing a ball. Everyone is decked out in gowns and tuxedos. Joanna (Nicole Kidman) now has very long, strawberry blonde hair and is talking and acting like a robot.

This is one of many examples where the film becomes unhinged. Joanna sneaks into the computer room and corrupts the entire computer system (how? she is not a computer programmer?). We then see all the wives suddenly grasp their foreheads, to demonstrate awful headaches and returning to their normal selves! Since one wife was able to accept a debit card and dispense money with her mouth, how is it possible that she is not totally a robot? The filmmakers think we are stupid.

In addition, if they wanted us to believe Joanna was faking being a robot, why didn't they leave her short, dark hairdo alone? Instead of having Nicole Kidman wear a long wig, she has her own natural hairdo. This would've been okay, if they had styled it like a wig. I do not know of any wig company that offers a combed-back hairline style, do you?

When we return to the ballroom, the scene ends with Mike (Christopher Walken) having his head knocked off, revealing a computerized interior. So Mike is a robot. Claire (Glenn Close) reveals to all present that she killed Mike after finding him in bed with his new, much younger work assistant. If this is true, then why weren't the wives, in the new Stepford community which she founded, killed off as well?

Many great actors thrusts into a lackluster film. Just plain sad.

The Sisterhood is portrayed in "now and then". The casting of the older sisterhood was Ellen Burstyn as Vivi, Fionnula Flanagan as Teensey, Shirley Knight as Necie and Maggie Smith as Caro, all brilliant. The problem was the casting of the four actresses who portrayed the sisterhood when they were younger.

Ashley Judd does not resemble Ellen Burstyn as a younger woman and neither do the other three actresses portraying Teensey, Necie and Maggie, respectively. This made the film very confusing to watch. The film often reverted back and forth, from present day to the past. As the writers did not use the sisterhood names enough in the script, the viewer could not readily identify who they were.

EXAMPLE (SPOILER ALERT): Ashley Judd is riding a bike with a friend (never identified, is it Carol or Necie or somebody else?) over a bridge. They are stopped by a young man. Who is he? (I had to look up his face on IMDb to find he is listed as Vivi's brother, Pete!) The young man says, "Vivi, we have to go to Teensey's house." He was sad. They leave to go to Teensey's house. I still do not know who is the other girl on the bike. If the writers had added to Pete's dialogue, "Caro (or Necie?), come with us" then it would have helped the viewer know who she is. When the three arrive at Teensey's house, you slowly realize that Teensey's brother is Jack, Vivi's fiancé, who was killed in the war. And the viewer was to know they were related, how? This happened so often in the film that I kept rewinding scenes to "get" the film.

The film is a disturbing look at Vivi's life. She never recovered from Jack's death, married Shep (James Garner) on the rebound, had 4 children, and was completely unhappy, almost to the point of hating everyone around her. She heads on a downward spiral, ending up an alcoholic.

(SPOILER ALERT) When Siddalee (excellently portrayed by Sandra Bullock, as Vivi's eldest daughter) was a young girl, Vivi had a total nervous breakdown. Vivi then disappeared, in Siddalee's eyes. Siddalee and her siblings thought their mother went away because they were bad. Siddalee remembers it wrongly because Vivi made Shep swear never to tell the children she had been committed. Because this tragic secret had never been revealed to Siddalee, she had been in and out of therapy her entire life.

I am honestly not an Ashley Judd fan. Most of the film rested on her shoulders. We realize that Vivi is emotionally scarred due to a jealous, mentally unstable mother. I could've felt sorry for Vivi, but Judd did not make the character likable. In many scene, Judd either underacts or overacts. Later in the film, the modern-day Necie says to Siddalee, "I wish you could've known your mother when she was younger. She was so likable." And I said out loud, "no, she not."